<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 07/19/2012 2:33 PM, Kris Moore wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:500860F2.5060307@pcbsd.org" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 07/19/2012 13:53, Arthur wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5008499B.4050300@neiu.edu" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
Ah, I figured as much. Well, due to the limits of x86 and how it
handles the 4GB limit, realistically 2-2.6GB is actually available for
use to the OS while the remainder is for address space. That being
said, x86 may "see" 4GB installed via BIOS call and satisfy the 4GB
minimum (on paper) and proceed with ZFS but ultimately not yield good
performance because the reality is the OS can't truly use all of the
4GB. It's a bit of a paradox. Might it not be better to disable the use
of ZFS on x86 altogether?<br>
<br>
Arthur<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Done! Now it'll only suggest ZFS as the default if we are running on
the 64 bit image. That should fix some issues like this :)<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Awesome! Thanks!<br>
<br>
Arthur<br>
</body>
</html>